Serbian FM warns Serbia could destabilize Europe if Kosovo becomes independent

Associated Press: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 9:39 AM

BELGRADE, Serbia-The foreign minister warned on Wednesday that Serbia could again become a source of instability in Europe if Kosovo becomes independent against Belgrade's will.

Vuk Draskovic's remarks came as senior European Union officials visited Belgrade to urge the formation of a pro-democracy government that would reconsider its outright rejection of an U.N. plan for Kosovo that offers the breakaway province virtual statehood.

In return, the EU could offer Serbia a quick resumption of pre-membership talks, suspended last year over Belgrade's failure to arrest Bosnian Serb war crimes suspect Gen. Ratko Mladic and hand him over to the U.N. war crimes tribunal in The Hague.

"Serbia is now the source of stability in the Balkans," Draskovic said after meeting with Britain's Europe Minister Geoff Hoon. "It is necessary to avoid an imposed solution (for Kosovo) that could cause Serbia to (again) become a factor of instability."

Before arriving in Belgrade, EU Foreign Policy chief Javier Solana visited Kosovo's capital, Pristina, where he urged ethnic Albanians to remain calm as the process to solve the province's future enters what is expected to be the final round of negotiations.

"I expect from you at this moment responsibility, calm and hard work,"

Solana told Kosovo Albanian leaders. "Nothing will be done for you, you have to do it."

Solana, along with the bloc's Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn and German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency, arrived in Belgrade later Wednesday.

EU officials hope a Serbian new government would abandon an outright rejection of the U.N. plan for Kosovo, which envisages that the breakaway southern province be granted internationally supervised self-rule with the trappings of statehood, including its own army and constitution.

"Serbia is the largest and the most populous country on the Balkans, and we know that there is no final solution" for Kosovo without Serbia, Steinmeier said. "We will underline once again our expectations that Serbia will stick to its European perspective."

The formation of a new government is crucial for whether the troubled Balkan country continues on its pro-European path, or returns to its years of defiance and international isolation as during the rule of late autocrat Slobodan Milosevic in the 1990s, during his Balkan war campaigns.

Forming a government has been held up by disagreement over who should be the next prime minister.

Outgoing Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica, a nationalist, insists on retaining his job, while the pro-Western Democratic Party, which emerged as the strongest within the reformist bloc after the Sept. 21 elections, wants the top post for their candidate.

Kostunica has left open a possibility of forming a coalition government with the ultranationalist Serbian Radical Party, which won the most votes in the election and had ruled Serbia together with Milosevic in the 1990s.

That would doom Serbia's pre-membership talks with the European Union.

Serbian officials have expressed hope that if a pro-democracy government is formed soon, negotiations with the EU would resume even if Mladic is not immediately handed over to the U.N. war crimes tribunal.

Some EU officials have said this would be possible, but that the final aid and trade Stabilization and Association Agreement with Serbia could be signed only when Mladic, who has been indicted for genocide during the 1992-95 Bosnia war, is handed over to the tribunal.

Serbs Urged to Accept Kosovo Plan to Gain ‘European Future’

Council on Foreign Relation
February 6, 2007

Interview with Daniel Fried, Assistant Secretary of State, U.S. State Department


UN envoy Martti Ahtisaari has proposed a plan allowing for phased independence for the Serbian province of Kosovo, which a number of Western policymakers hope will settle the last remaining Balkan security problem. Leading Serbian officials have denounced the plan but were still undecided on negotiating tactics amid the formation of a new government.
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried, a top official responsible for American policy in the region, says despite the official protests, Serbian opinion is “radically shifted” on Kosovo’s independence. He urged Belgrade to take advantage of UN-brokered talks this month to shape how Kosovo will be governed before the matter advances to the UN Security Council. Without Belgrade’s engagement, Fried says, “Serbia exists in kind of an outer orbit in sullen isolation, and nobody wants that.”

The UN plan for Kosovo has created a fairly strong reaction in Serbia. They’re asking for more time to consider it as they get their government together. But with the current climate in Serbia, how can this succeed?

Well, I’m happy to tell you that your news is just slightly out of date. The Serbian press reaction is not uniformly hostile. And I refer you to a fascinating major piece that appeared in yesterday’s edition of Politika, [a column by Politika foreign correspondent Bosko Jaksic] which is not a marginal but mainstream daily. In fact it is the leading Serbian daily—has been since before World War I—which said basically “it is time for us to join Europe and get over Kosovo.” The reaction to that piece this morning was mixed; in other words, not uniformly hostile. My point is that Serbian opinion is radically shifted. It’s obviously very divided. But many people, including those who don’t follow this, assume that Serbian opinion is what the radicals—that is, the extremist nationalists—want it to be, and that’s not necessarily the case.

Although a lot of people are responding to outgoing Prime Minister [Vojislav] Kostunica’s comments about not having relations with countries that recognize an independent Kosovo.

Well, yes he said that. And he also last week was saying they would not sit down at all with [UN envoy Martti] Ahtisaari until there was a new government. However, today apparently they said other things and suggested that no, they have a slightly different approach and once it convenes, the parliament may give them a mandate to negotiate. So this is a very different position from the one that we were faced with a few days ago, and it’s a more hopeful one. Now, does this mean we know what the final Serbian position is either on procedures or ultimate outcomes? No, we don’t. But it is a mistake to take one set of Serbian positions and then expect them not to change. They’ve already changed. And they’ve changed significantly within a few days.

So is it a matter of, perhaps, ripe timing? The notion of conditional independence has been out there for quite some time.

What [Ahtisaari] has done is come up with a very strong plan, which will, among other things, give strong, enforceable guarantees to the Serbian community, including the Serb majority communities both north of the Ibar [River in northern Kosovo], that’s the Mitrovica area, and south of the Ibar, that’s where two-thirds of the Kosovar Serbs actually live, strong guarantees to the Serbian monasteries and their lands, including protection zones to make sure that their lands are not encroached upon, and other guarantees which make a kind of mono-ethnic state or an extreme nationalistic state much more difficult if not impossible. Moreover, the international community, according to Ahtisaari’s plan, will remain in Kosovo for a considerable period of time after [final] status [is set]. Now, this is not a take-it-or-leave-it plan. Ahtisaari’s been very clear he wants input from the Kosovar Albanians, the Kosovar Serbs with whom he has met, and the Serbian government. And we have confidence in Ahtisaari. But it is also clear that the status quo is not sustainable, and we cannot go back to the situation of 1999. And Ahtisaari—with our full support and the full backing of our European allies and so far, actually, of Russia as well—is looking for a fair solution.

You mentioned the input from Kosovo Serbs and the Serbian community, but really, in terms of all the safeguards you’ve outlined, what more could they ask for that could be obliged? If they came up with a partition plan for the north, for example?

Well, we don’t support partition, and the Contact Group, which includes the United States, the European Union, German, Britain, France, Italy and Russia, has rejected partition. Partition is a bad idea. We understand that a lot of the Serbs who live north of the Ibar are attracted by this, but partition is a bad idea. We have certainly accepted the notion that a nationalist agenda for Kosovo, no matter whose nationalism you’re talking about, is also unacceptable. But there may be suggestions that the Serbs want to make about the municipalities, about security arrangements, and it’s up to them to engage in this process finally. Ahtisaari’s been trying to get engagement for a year. He hasn’t succeeded. And now at this very late stage it is not too late, I’m happy to say. And we hope Serbia and Kosovar Serbs sit down. I think it’s important that Serbia let the Kosovar Serbs sit down. That’s been a problem. And the Kosovar Albanians have already indicated their willingness, in fact their eagerness, to engage with Ahtisaari.

Now one of the plans outlined calls for an international official, appointed by the EU I believe, to have the power to replace troublesome officials and so forth, echoing the Bosnian international high representative. Is the Bosnian model generally seen as a successful one?

The Bosnian model is reasonably successful, though not complete. We’re not happy with some of the constitutional arrangements of Bosnia that have prevailed. And we’re encouraging the Bosnians themselves to make Bosnia a little more functional as a government, as a country. But Bosnia has worked out reasonably well. It is far more peaceful. The economy is somewhat more developed. There have been more returnees than people expected. And certain institutions like the military have really changed. It is true that Ahtisaari’s proposals envision a period of international supervision over a post-status Kosovo. The Kosovars have accepted this principle. It also envisions a continued presence of KFOR, the NATO-led security operation that has maintained the peace these many years, with one terrible outbreak of violence in March 2004, but it has been generally a successful operation. And this means that the extremist Kosovar position of unconditional, immediate independence and presumably a nationalist flavor to that independence will not be realized.

Getting back to the Contact Group, obviously Russia’s opinion is important.

Well, the Contact Group supported Ahtisaari’s mission. Russia has its own views and they should speak for themselves. I’m not going to speak for Russia, but we’re in close touch with our Russian colleagues about this.

Speaking for the U.S., though, are you troubled by a looming Russian blockade of this in the UN Security Council?

I think it is certainly in everybody’s interest, including Russia’s interest, that there be a peaceful, sustainable settlement in the Balkans. It is in no one’s interest to provoke instability. And I hope that Russia behaves in a way that allows a settlement to take shape that is respectful and protective of the Serbian population—that’s critically important, and we agree that there have to be strong guarantees put in place—but also respects the interests and ultimately the will of the 95 percent of the population that is ethnic Albanian. And I think we’re discussing this with the Russians. They have the ability to play a very constructive role, and their Balkan experts are very skillful and knowledgeable people.
Russia last year raised the point that independence for Kosovo may set a precedent for breakaway regions like those in Georgia, such as Abkhazia and so forth. Is there concern of creating this type of precedent?

Well, separatists may claim this as a precedent, but separatists have existed for a long time. The fact is Kosovo is not a precedent for other conflicts at all. It just isn’t. Kosovo is a unique situation, because NATO was forced to intervene to stop and then reverse ethnic cleansing. The Security Council authorized effective Kosovo to be ruled effectively by the United Nations, not by Serbia. UN Council Resolution 1244 also stated that Kosovo’s final status would be the subject of negotiation. Those conditions do not pertain to any of the conflicts that are usually brought up in this context. It’s not applicable to Abkhazia, or South Ossetia, or Transdniester. Nor is it applicable to Chechnya or to any separatist conflicts in Europe.

Why is it important to get this settled now?

Well, we found out, and we found out the hard way, that war in the Balkans was nothing we could simply draw a red line around and ignore. That’s where we started in 1991 and 1992 as Yugoslavia broke up. We found that security in Europe required us to go in and stabilize the situation in the former Yugoslavia, first to help end the war in Bosnia, and of course, [Richard] Holbrooke [former U.S. special envoy] played a major and laudable role in bringing about the solution at Dayton. In 1999, Madeleine Albright led NATO, and NATO allies contributed to a campaign which forced [former Yugoslav President Slobodan] Milosevic’s predatory armies out of Kosovo. And the fact is that security to Europe is important to American security. That isn’t theory. We found that to be true in practice.
So the Balkans can still be the ‘soft underbelly’?

Well, metaphors. Take your pick. If Kosovo can be resolved, the last major unsolved issue of European security will be done. And then the Balkans can become sort of the new Central Europe; that is, an area rapidly converging with Europe. Serbia needs a European future. Otherwise, Serbia exists in kind of an outer orbit in sullen isolation, and nobody wants that. The Serbian people deserve a European future. And to get there, Kosovo has to be resolved. So if we can resolve Kosovo this year, all of the Balkans can start moving into Europe, and we will have fixed a major problem in wars throughout the twentieth century and the threat of war in the twenty first. This is important. And Europe and the United States are determined to see this through in a way which is respectful both of our security interests and our values, and we have an opportunity to do so.

To come back to your original point, you’re heartened by seeing some signs that [Serbs] see it in their own interest to now embrace this, or if not embrace it to accept it and accept what it ultimately means for Euro-Atlantic ties?

Well, I don’t want to exaggerate Serbian willingness to engage seriously. My point was that they are now debating what their stance should be. After basically a long time, a year or more, of simply denial and refusal to engage, they’re now debating this. And I think wise Serbs understand that nationalism has brought nothing but ruin and misery to Serbia. And they’re looking down this pit again and listening to the same tired voices of nationalism make the same tired arguments. And some Serbs, at least, reject this. I have said before that nationalism is like cheap alcohol. First, it makes you drunk, then it makes you blind, and then it kills you. And I think the Serbs have woken up to that, or at least some of them. And they deserve a better future. I lived in Serbia for three years. I like Serbs. I want them to find a European future. They deserve a European future. It’s up to them, though. It’s not up to us.

Kosovo Albanian Reactions on Ahtisaari’s package keep unfolding

(Dailies, UNMIK Media monitoring report, 7 Feb 2007)

Reactions triggered by the presentation of Ahtisaari’s proposal last week are still making headlines in Kosovo newspapers.

Koha Ditore reports that the Presidency of the Kosovo Assembly has decided to invite all five members of the Unity Team in a special parliamentary session to discuss the stance they will take in forthcoming Vienna meetings planned to start on 13 February. The members of the Assembly will also have an opportunity to debate over the package.

Koha Ditore also reports that representatives of the Community of Serb Municipalities and Towns in Kosovo have rejected the proposal of Martti Ahtisaari calling ‘all its elements unacceptable for the Serbian side’.  They also call on Serbian authorities to initiate the replacement of Ahtisaari from the post of mediator, says a press release signed by Community chief, Marko Jaksic.

Koha Ditore writes that the Municipal Assembly in Vitia also rejects the decentralization part in this town proposed in Ahtisaari’s package. They reiterate their position that they are against the creation of a new municipality in Kllokot and in general against the creation of mono-ethnic municipalities.

Under the headline LKÇK and KLA war associations against Ahtisaari’s proposal, Zëri reports that, according to the leader of the National Movement for the Liberation of Kosovo (LKÇK), Smajl Latifi, and the leader of KLA War Associations, Faik Fazliu, the fact that Ahtisaari’s package does not mention Serbia’s sovereignty over Kosovo does not mean that this recognizes Kosovo’s right for independence and therefore the proposal was deemed unacceptable.

Latifi said that Ahtisaari’s proposal does not take at all into account the will of Kosovo people, while Fazliu said that the war associations are against any tendency that aims at denying the people of Kosovo the right to be independent.   

Fazliu also criticized the annex of the proposal that deals with the KPC. He said that any effort to dissolve the KPC and create a different security force is very dangerous because, he said, the KPC should be transformed into the new Kosovo protection force, writes Zëri.

Zëri carries an editorial by publisher Blerim Shala who says that postponements, prolongations and delays have remained the only strategy of Belgrade officials when it comes to Kosovo’s status. Further delays are not even in the interest of Serbia, because the sooner the Kosovo issue is solved, the sooner can Belgrade focus on its real day-to-day problems, concludes Shala.

Iliria Post writes that 26 European countries, with the exception of Greece which expressed some reservations, have supported Ahtisaari’s plan in a meeting Ahtisaari’s deputy Albert Rohan had with EU officials in Brussels. According to the paper, during the meeting, it was said that Ahtisaari intends to prepare the grounds for the new UN Security Council Resolution on Kosovo to be approved in April when the United Kingdom is chairing the Security Council.

Dailies report that Vetevendosja movement have against voiced their opposition to Ahtisaari’s package saying that it ‘deceives the people’ of Kosovo as it does not respect the will of the majority population.  Express reports that, according to a survey carried out by Vetevendosja, 80 % of the people of Kosovo are unhappy with the package. The movement leader, Albin Kurti, accuses the Albanian negotiators of having betrayed the will of the people for independence and sovereignty.

Express writes in another article that Ahtisaari’s package is giving 2,500 hectares of land to Macedonia.

Infopress writes that the Turkish and Bosniac communities in Kosovo have serious remarks, as, according to them, the minority communities in Kosovo have not been treated in the same way, with Bosniaks and Turks barely being mentioned in the document.

In another article, Infopress writes that Ahtisaari has ‘renewed’ the license of the political University in Mitrovica, which the paper calls a Kosovo university with students from Serbia.

The leaders of Kosovo have accepted Ahtisaari’s plan even without reading it, says Kosova Sot in an editorial. They accept the package, which means they accept to pay back the $800 millions debt of the former Yugoslavia, and to pay back to Belgrade the part of the international debt that was already paid. They accept Serbs being ‘super’ community in a Kosovo ‘state’. They accept giving away thousand of hectares of land to Macedonia. They accept decentralization on an ethnic basis. They accept curriculums from the Republic of Serbia. They accept the dissolution of the KPC without being sure how the new security force will be established. They accept ‘cultural heritage’ to imply Serbian orthodox property. They accept being subject to Serbian votes to make amendments in the Constitution.  They accept Serbia to finance municipalities with Serbian majority. And, on top of all this, they accept again an international chief administrator that will have all the necessary legal mechanisms to annul any decision by the Kosovo institution that would be considered in contradiction to the status agreement or that would violate the position of super-privileged Serbs.

Ahtisaari does not want any more delays, writes Koha Ditore in its lead story, saying that, the UN Special Envoy for Kosovo’s status, Martti Ahtisaari, does not see a reason for further postponing the status process.

“If somebody asks for more time, I will ask them: Will that have an impact on your positions? Therefore, I do not believe that, by giving more time to the process, we could change anything,” the paper quotes Ahtisaari as saying in an interview for Financial Times. Solution or return of violence, Kosova Sot quotes Ahtisaari as saying in the same interview.

Kurti: Ahtisaari’s Proposal Is Anti-Albanian And Pro-Serbian

Radio Kosovo in Albanian, 06 Feb 07

 The Self-Determination movement evaluated today (Tuesday) that the proposal of the United Nations special envoy for Kosovo status Martti Ahtisaari disables the fulfillment of the will of Kosovo people for independence.

 The Self-Determination leader, Albin Kurti said that Ahtisaari’s package is a concretization of the substantial autonomy that was earlier proposed by Serbia. Kurti focused on the six asymmetric situations of this package.

“It is anti-Albanian and pro-Serbian. Second, cultural heritage is considered to be the Serb Orthodox heritage only. Instead of discussing the war damages that Serbia caused to Kosovo, Ahtisaari’s package deals with decentralization and it is known that the Albanian municipalities will have less authority. This mission will deal with Kosovo’s debts. Instead of dismantling the Serbian parallel and paramilitary structures, the Kosovo Protection Corps (TMK) is getting disbanded”, Kurti said.

The Self-Determination movement has announced a protest against Ahtisaari’s package on February 10th in Pristina.